North Augusta officials preview vote to rezone Riverside Village parcel D and seek $5M purchase of parking assets using DOE funds

City staff told the North Augusta City Council at a study session on April 13 that they will present a package of linked items next week to change the permitted use of a Riverside Village parcel and to purchase adjacent parking assets.

The package centers on Ordinance 2026‑06, a second‑reading amendment to the Riverside Village plan development to change Parcel D from residential/townhomes with limited retail into commercial office space, and Resolution 2026‑05, a proposed city purchase of parcels B and D for $5 million. City Administrator Jim Clifford said the ordinance is limited to a change in Parcel D’s planned use and that planning commission has already reviewed the item. Clifford said the 80,000‑square‑foot figure cited in staff materials is an engineering estimate of the maximum building footprint that could fit on the site, not a financial commitment to build to that size.

Why it matters: Parcel B is the privately owned stadium parking deck (currently owned by Greenstone) and Parcel D is the last undeveloped piece of Riverside Village near the brick pond and SRP Park. Staff said buying parcel B would secure off‑site parking needed if Parcel D is redeveloped, and using purchase authority would allow the city to standardize parking systems across decks and go to market for a unified parking solution.

Funding and constraints: Clifford said the $5 million purchase price and any accompanying tax abatement for the calendar year would be funded from Department of Energy (DOE) settlement funds that were allocated through a legislative process; he told the council that North Augusta proposed cyber infrastructure projects to the delegation when municipalities were asked for eligible lists. Staff emphasized the DOE funds are designated for cyber‑infrastructure projects and not general fund spending.

Council reaction and tradeoffs: Several council members raised objections at the study session, questioning the local public‑access benefits and environmental tradeoffs of converting a near‑downtown green parcel into a commercial/cyber facility. One councilmember said the city risks displacing wildlife and losing a park amenity that is widely visited; another cited uncertainty about how many local residents would gain employment from a cyber tenant. Supporters on the dais argued the cyber/infrastructure project is a long‑term investment in economic development and workforce opportunities for future generations. The exchange did not produce a final vote; staff and council framed both the ordinance and the purchase resolution as contingent items to be taken up at the upcoming public hearing and regular council meeting.

Next steps: The ordinance (zoning/PD amendment) requires two votes (first and second reading); staff told the council the purchase resolution will be a single‑vote action. If the ordinance fails, staff said there would be no point in moving forward with the associated purchase and master development agreement amendment. Final design, engineering and parking solutions were described as future city council approvals.

Authorities and items referenced: Ordinance 2026‑06 (Riverside Village/Parcel D), Resolution 2026‑05 (purchase of parcels B and D), proposed fifth amendment to the Master Development Agreement tied to parcel D changes.

Ending: The council did not vote at the study session; staff will bring the ordinance, resolution and related MDA amendment to the published public hearing and regular meeting next week for formal action.